责任与限度：高等教育办学主体研究

【作者】 祝爱武；

【导师】 胡建华；

【作者基本信息】 南京师范大学 ， 高等教育学， 2012， 博士

【摘要】 高等教育办学主体问题属于政府与社会之关系范畴,它所关注的焦点是作为高等教育办学主体的政府、第三部门、市场主体怎样实现公共高等教育利益最大化,贯穿其中的一条主线是“何以”和“如何”发挥各高等教育办学主体的创造性使一定条件下的公共高等教育具有最大规模、最高质量。这是研究现代大学制度无法绕开的命题。本文分为六章。分别讨论高等教育办学主体的概念与分类基础、各高等教育办学主体的责任与限度以及高等教育办学主体的构成状况。第一章区分了大学的“立”和“办”,为避免使用宽泛概念造成逻辑混乱而影响研究效果,本文中的高等教育办学主体取义为高等教育的举办者,并主要依据萨拉蒙的三元框架理论,将高等教育办学主体区分为政府、第三部门和市场主体。第二章着重对高等教育的属性进行了探讨,认为高等教育既具有很强的公共性和私人性,值得全社会投入,同时认为高等教育又具有准公共产品属性,举办高等教育需要动员全社会力量,发挥全社会的创造力。第三章提出政府办学的特征是“以强制求公益”,这使公共高等教育利益有赖于政府,有时也受制于政府,为了促进公共高等教育利益最大化,政府作为高等教育办学主体必需具有一定的责任与行为限度,本文认为政府举办大学具有对大学的宏观规划、财政投入等责任,具有为受教育者提供适合的、公平的、越多越好的高等教育等责任,具有对公共高等教育资源公正分配和有效使用等责任；同时认为政府举办大学的目标追求限于公益、活动内容限于大学外部公共事务、办学状况限于一定时期经济社会发展水平。第四章提出第三部门办学具有“以志愿求公益”的特征,这是利用社会散财之道与人们的志愿精神增进公共高等教育利益的一条重要途径,要充分发挥这条途径的作用,探讨第三部门作为高等教育办学主体的责任与限度问题很有必要,本文认为第三部门作为高等教育办学主体需要承担自身组织的培育与可持续发展责任,需要承担对资助者、受助者和政府的责任,同时认为第三部门办学限于社会对第三部门的认识、限于政府对第三部门办学的规范要求与扶持力度、限于第三部门办学中的资金与人才等条件。第五章提出市场主体办学的特征是“以志愿求私益”,市场主体作为高等教育办学主体已被美国、印度等国家所认可,市场主体在高等教育办学中承担“走‘文化钢丝’”之责任,需要平衡商业文化与学术文化之价值,同时其行为在办学环境、面向对象、办学内容、办学导向等方面也有限度。第六章在同分异构思想指导下以比较的视角探讨了高等教育办学主体之构成状况,提出了欧洲模式、美国模式、日本模式等高等教育办学主体构成模式,分析了我国高等教育办学主体构成状况,探讨了我国高等教育办学主体的发展趋势,认为第三部门作为我国高等教育办学主体的作用将越来越大,在相当长的时期内政府仍将是我国高等教育的主要办学主体,政府与第三部门将具有更强的合作性。更多还原

【Abstract】 The sponsors’responsibility and limitation issue in higher education belongs to the project of relationship between government and society. This issue focuses on how to maximize the interests of the public higher education by the government, the third sector and the market subject, as the main founders, and the main point is how to make public higher education possess the best scale and quality in certain condition. This issue could not be avoided on the study of modern university system.There are six chapters, which cover on the concepts and the classifications of higher education’s sponsor, the view of analyzing, the responsibilities and limitations of each sponsor and the constitutions of them. The first chapter distinguishes establishment and management of the university. In order to study logically, the writer disuse the vague concepts and make the higher education’s subject be the sponsor, which is distinguished as the government, the third sector and the market subject according to Lester M.Salamon’s ternary theory. The second chapter discusses the nature of higher education, and makes the conclusion that higher education deserves the whole-society input as its’strong publicity and privateness. The higher education is a kind of blend public production, and it needs the whole society’forces and innovations. The third chapter raises the characteristic of government sponsor be public welfare-out-of-force. This means that the public welfare of higher education sometimes relays on the government, and sometimes be limited by it. The government, as higher education’s sponsor, should be provided with certain responsibilities and limitations. The responsibilities contain the macroscopic planning and financial input, the supply of the most compatible, fairest and the best higher education, the impartial distribution and the effective use of public higher education’s resources. The limitations contains target confined to public welfare, content limited to public affairs outside university, state restricted to certain level of social economy. The fourth chapter raises the characteristic of the third sector’s sponsor be public welfare-out-of-aspiration. This is a vital way to make use of social dispersed wealth and people’s aspiration. The discussion of the third sector’s responsibility and limitation should be helpful to strengthen its’effects. The third sector, being higher education’s sponsor, should take the responsibility of self-nurture and sustainable development, and of the sponsors, receivers, and government. Also, its’limitations display the society’s cognition, the government’s specification demand and support, and fund and talents in the third sector and so on. The fifth chapter raises the characteristic of market subject be private welfare-out-of-aspiration. The market subject is accepted as higher education’s sponsor in America and Indian. This subject takes the responsibility of walking cultural-wire which needs to balance the values between commercial culture and academic culture, and also the limitation of social environment, objects, content and guidance. The sixth chapter compares the relationship between the sponsors in multi-higher education, presents the constitution of different sponsors in higher education, such as Europe pattern, America pattern and Japan pattern, analyses the current constitution state of our higher education’s subject, and expects the development of our higher education’s sponsors, which indicates that the third sector plays more and more important role as higher education’s sponsor, and the government can still be the main sponsor and be more co-operative with the third sector.更多还原